A forum thread on GameFAQs has indications that Risen 2: Dark Waters may be the latest game to ship with what's supposed to be future DLC included on the retail disc. The thread outlines the discovery, and spawns one of those heated discussions over the ethics of making content on the game disc dependant on a future. Thanks Blend Games.

Quboid wrote on May 6, 2012, 17:49:There's just something fundamentally wrong with making us buy something on the disc we've already bought. That's an insult.

I'm reminded of the the Quake shareware CD from 16 years ago. It was awesome, it cost $5 and contained the shareware version of quake, as well as the full versions of every id Software game to date, you just had to call a 1-800 number and pay to activate them.

It would have been a great idea if it weren't cracked within the year. But my point is that this is hardly a new idea.

Mad Max RW wrote on May 6, 2012, 21:00:The worst games seem to attract the most apologists. And after this game disappears forever instead of admitting you're morons you'll find some other horrible piece of shit to defend.

You moron!

Here's a free insult for you sir.Use it to wreak havok on the interwebs.Let no one escape thee.For there can be only one lord of the morons.And he does not share p0wah.

Jerykk wrote on May 7, 2012, 02:18:While I appreciate that Bethesda is taking their time to create meaningful DLC, I don't appreciate that this DLC will be available on X360 for a month before being released on PS3 and PC. If you're going to do DLC, you should release it at the same time for all platforms. I know it's hard to resist Microsoft's bribes but if you truly respect your customers, you should avoid doing anything that screws them, such as timed platform exclusivity.

Given the amount of exclusive features on the PC - high resolution textures, Steam Workshop / mod support, DX11 support, etc - I don't have a problem with a small delay. Obviously I'd prefer it be released on all platforms simultaneously but I've taken for granted that anything involving Microsoft and gaming will end up screwing over customers.

As always, greedy publishers take things too far and it ends up being completely counter-productive. Just look at Skyrim for an example of how to do things right - it's been out for half a year and still hasn't received any DLC because they're taking their time with it. They could have put out a quick cash-in - as they did previously with the horse armour - but instead they are treating their customers with respect. Not only that but they have offered a lot of free support. Most games nowadays received plenty of DLC but rarely ever receive any other support.

While I appreciate that Bethesda is taking their time to create meaningful DLC, I don't appreciate that this DLC will be available on X360 for a month before being released on PS3 and PC. If you're going to do DLC, you should release it at the same time for all platforms. I know it's hard to resist Microsoft's bribes but if you truly respect your customers, you should avoid doing anything that screws them, such as timed platform exclusivity.

I fully appreciate that content development wraps up long before the game is released and that time can be used to produce DLC. The problem is that DLC is being factored into the development process, often designed to launch alongside the game or within the first month - this is being used as an excuse to remove content that would have otherwise been available. This was highlighted perfectly by Street Fighter X Tekken, which included 12 DLC characters on the disc to be released later as DLC. The content was meant to be released towards the end of the year, yet it was fully functional and people were able to "hack" the game to unlock it early. It is simply being used as a way to screw more money out of customers by releasing a deliberately gimped game.

As always, greedy publishers take things too far and it ends up being completely counter-productive. Just look at Skyrim for an example of how to do things right - it's been out for half a year and still hasn't received any DLC because they're taking their time with it. They could have put out a quick cash-in - as they did previously with the horse armour - but instead they are treating their customers with respect. Not only that but they have offered a lot of free support. Most games nowadays received plenty of DLC but rarely ever receive any other support.

None of that sounds especially appealing. And this is from someone who actually likes complex combat systems.

I haven't played any of the games though, so I can'/t swear to it. It just doesn't sound very fun.

It's definitely an acquired taste. You basically can't make any mistakes, which in turn makes the combat much more intense. You have to scout your enemies and think carefully about when and where to engage. I find this more appealing than the combat in other action RPGs like Kingdoms of Amalur or Elder Scrolls, where you just wade in to battle and mash LMB as quickly as possible.

I think I'd prefer a middle ground. Interesting combat shouldn't necessarily be so painstaking that you can't sometimes just go with your instincts and rain blows down on the enemy(within reason and depending on the enemy).

That's the main reason why the combat in PB's games is loathed by so many people. There isn't really any middle-ground. Every fight is slow and methodical (until you basically become a god at the end of the game) and you will inevitably die many, many times. Since each enemy has its own distinct attack patterns, it takes a while to memorize them all and become good enough to consistently counter them.

None of that sounds especially appealing. And this is from someone who actually likes complex combat systems.

I haven't played any of the games though, so I can'/t swear to it. It just doesn't sound very fun.

It's definitely an acquired taste. You basically can't make any mistakes, which in turn makes the combat much more intense. You have to scout your enemies and think carefully about when and where to engage. I find this more appealing than the combat in other action RPGs like Kingdoms of Amalur or Elder Scrolls, where you just wade in to battle and mash LMB as quickly as possible.

I think I'd prefer a middle ground. Interesting combat shouldn't necessarily be so painstaking that you can't sometimes just go with your instincts and rain blows down on the enemy(within reason and depending on the enemy).

None of that sounds especially appealing. And this is from someone who actually likes complex combat systems.

I haven't played any of the games though, so I can'/t swear to it. It just doesn't sound very fun.

It's definitely an acquired taste. You basically can't make any mistakes, which in turn makes the combat much more intense. You have to scout your enemies and think carefully about when and where to engage. I find this more appealing than the combat in other action RPGs like Kingdoms of Amalur or Elder Scrolls, where you just wade in to battle and mash LMB as quickly as possible.

Risen 2 does make the combat a bit more forgiving though. In G1 and 2, drinking a health potion or eating food forced you to sit through a fully-committed animation, meaning you couldn't heal during combat. In Risen 2, you can use any item at any time, allowing you to heal instantly during combat. You can still get stunlocked and killed pretty easily, but you still have a chance to survive.

PHJF wrote on May 6, 2012, 23:58:Combat in Risen was awful, plain and simple.

I assume you didn't like the combat in G1 or G2, either? Because the combat in Risen was pretty much the same, except blocking with shields was a bit overpowered.

As always, the combat in PB's games is an acquired taste. I enjoy it (except when it was dumbed down in G3 and to a lesser extent, Risen 2) but I can see why others wouldn't. It has always had a relatively steep learning curve and a very low tolerance for user error, with fully-committed enemy attacks and player hit reactions usually resulting in the player's death.

None of that sounds especially appealing. And this is from someone who actually likes complex combat systems.

I haven't played any of the games though, so I can'/t swear to it. It just doesn't sound very fun.

PHJF wrote on May 6, 2012, 23:58:Combat in Risen was awful, plain and simple.

I assume you didn't like the combat in G1 or G2, either? Because the combat in Risen was pretty much the same, except blocking with shields was a bit overpowered.

As always, the combat in PB's games is an acquired taste. I enjoy it (except when it was dumbed down in G3 and to a lesser extent, Risen 2) but I can see why others wouldn't. It has always had a relatively steep learning curve and a very low tolerance for user error, with fully-committed enemy attacks and player hit reactions usually resulting in the player's death.

You mean the awful combat their games generally have is on purpose? heh

Well, yeah. The combat is supposed to be clunky. That's not a bug, it's just how it was designed. That doesn't make it awful, though. Combat in G1, G2 and Risen was all about learning enemy attack patterns and then timing your own dodges, blocks and attacks accordingly. There was a lot of depth and skill involved, which made success all the more satisfying. In Risen 2, they've made a major mistake in removing dodge. Now you have to rely on the Kick move instead, which works okay for some monsters but not so well for others. If you can't kick an enemy back, you're basically forced to run around in circles and rely on distractions so you don't get stunlocked. It's a shame because they've added a lot of other new moves to make combat more interesting, but most of these moves only work against human opponents.

Fact of the matter is every PB game is buggy as fuck. More often than not said bugs never get fixed before they're shelling the next sequel or IP.

I'm not sure how buggy "fuck" is but the Risen games really aren't that buggy. Pretty much every Bethesda, Obsidian and Bioware game has had more bugs. The Gothic games, on the other hand, were pretty bug (Gothic 3 in particular).

You mean the awful combat their games generally have is on purpose? heh

Fact of the matter is every PB game is buggy as fuck. More often than not said bugs never get fixed before they're shelling the next sequel or IP.

I'm not sure how buggy "fuck" is but the Risen games really aren't that buggy. Pretty much every Bethesda, Obsidian and Bioware game has had more bugs. The Gothic games, on the other hand, were pretty bug (Gothic 3 in particular).

Kajetan wrote on May 6, 2012, 17:10:Boy, there's some funny fanboy ranting

Normaly, the publisher chooses the DRM, but it's the dev who implements it. Normaly, it's the publishers descision to offer additional DLC and it's the devs job to create and implement it. And normaly, PB is well known for releasing buggy games since Gothic 1.

And seeing this little disaster, everything is the way it should be with games from PB

Did you even read his post, you just got through confirming what I said, then tried to pass it off as a rant? Yeah, they released buggy games, they have been 12-20 man team from about 1998 to 2008 they worked out of a converted house 12-18 hours a day (about as much as you run your mouth apparently) and for the most part are/have been a independent developer.

Yeah I did hear this was pretty buggy and why I was waiting on a patch, I knew Deep Silver would force it out early/buggy. Yet you seem so clueless about publishers pushing titles out, your ignorantly willing to blame the developer. I'm defiantly a fan of PB but I would and do defend any independent in these cases whether or not I'm a fan of the developer.

Essentially your were wrong on every count, good luck next time emo.

Perhaps they should then hire more people and get a damn office like every other quality developer in the industry. Fact of the matter is every PB game is buggy as fuck. More often than not said bugs never get fixed before they're shelling the next sequel or IP.

Though to be fair most games from European developers are buggy as fuck anyway to begin with.

Mad Max RW wrote on May 6, 2012, 21:00:The worst games seem to attract the most apologists. And after this game disappears forever instead of admitting you're morons you'll find some other horrible piece of shit to defend.

Um, what does DLC have to do with the quality of the game? And have you actually played the game? Your comment suggests that you haven't actually read any of the posts in this thread. This thread is a debate over the practice of including DLC on-disc and then charging customers to unlock it. Nobody's arguing over whether Risen 2 sucks or not.

is it just me or do all of the replies "for" on disc DLC (and im including those who claim they "dont get" the issue, epecially the "save us some bandwidth" reply) sound suspiciously like PR people astroturfing for the publishers? damage control much?

if you had any doubt a full product, its ideas, features, and content, are being divided up during development and sold to us piecemeal as DLC, this is it. if it wasnt the case in the past, it seems pretty freaking obvious thats whats going on now